TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
I think what is getting people upset is the way you are coming
across. It sounds like you are saying that this is the only way
to work. There is NEVER only one way to do something. It
sounds like you really enjoy the way your working and you
see it as the ideal situation. That's great. However, it won't
work for everyone else because people are people. It may
even be the ideal corporation, but that does not make it
ideal for everyone.
How can I possible discount other people's work just
because they don't work like I do? I know that is human
nature but it is not very productive and is very judgemental.
Melonie R. Holliman
Technical Writer
CPD Marketing
Advanced Micro Devices
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Altom [SMTP:taltom -at- SIMPLYWRITTEN -dot- COM]
> Sent: Friday, July 09, 1999 12:22 PM
> To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject: Fw: The Telecommuting Myth and ignorant remarks
>
> Good grief, Eric, I'm not preaching so much as explaining my own view of
> things. And it's apparent that we don't share it.
>
> It could be a definition of "team member". My use of the term "team" is
> nebulous at best, but it's the best I can come up with. Perhaps
> "organization member" would be better. By "fully participating" I don't
> mean
> " fully participating in getting this thing out the door" or even "fully
> participating in my quota of face time".
>
> What I AM talking about is hard to define and harder to create. But it's
> akin to the Notre Dame football team. Sure they want to win against every
> opponent. But on the back of every ND player is the burden of a century of
> expectations of winning. They carry the honor of ND every time they take
> the
> field. Sure, they work out alone sometimes. But a long succession of ND
> coaches have infused the ND way into their players, and it's made ND one
> of
> the most consistently feared football teams in the nation. It's not just
> hard-nosed football, but "football the ND way". They room together,
> practice
> together, eat together, and fight together, to become a team. It's like
> being in a tight, supportive family, a family in which the shared family
> values are more important than any momentary purchase or problem. And
> they're not brainwashed into it. They delight in being a Notre Dame
> player.
> See the movie "Rudie" for an example.
>
> There's no way a bunch of isolated players could be brought together
> occasionally and expect to field such a pile-driver team. They could
> "telecommute" and get individually stronger, read their playbooks, and get
> together for scrimmages on their own, but they still wouldn't be the Notre
> Dame team. In the military the same notion is called "unit integrity".
>
> I don't think you can foster this level of mutual commitment by telephone.
> Such unit integrity is built slowly as stories circulate and leadership
> has
> a chance to tug each person into a special place. When I mentioned The
> Cathedral and the Bazaar, it wasn't to advocate working alone and sending
> fi
> les to one another; it was to point out the power of a shared vision. The
> Open Source world has a single shared vision that arose spontaneously. In
> a
> company, that vision must be communicated, and that takes time. "Let's get
> this software done well" isn't a vision, and it isn't a basis for a
> long-term, happy company. It's an immediate goal.
>
> I'm sure you and many others have contributed significantly to many
> projects
> over the years. I'm not talking about projects, my friend. I'm speaking of
> the environment within which projects live. Certainly just working in an
> office doesn't mean that the environment is visionary. Most offices, most
> companies, aren't visionary. What I'm saying is that while being onsite
> doesn't guarantee a shared vision, being remote almost guarantees that you
> won't have it. Vision doesn't travel on wires; it travels via human
> beings.
> It's communicable, like a germ. It needs to jump from host to host.
>
> For a definition of "vision", consult the second of my references.
>
> Tim Altom
> Simply Written, Inc.
> Featuring FrameMaker and the Clustar Method(TM)
> "Better communication is a service to mankind."
> 317.562.9298
>http://www.simplywritten.com
>
>
>
> >So, you're saying that those of us (many with considerable experience)
> >who _think_ we're fully participating are mistaken and somehow
> >deluded? If that's not patronizing, I don't know what is.
> >Listen, Tim, I've been a cog in a wheel with my quota
> >of face time and chit-chat with people who didn't know my name
> >in the elevator, and I've been a _team_member_ from afar.
> >I'll guarantee you that I know the difference, just as I know
> >that I'm being patted on the head and patronized because my experience
> >doesn't mesh with your prejudices.
> >
>
>
> From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=
> =
>
